Originally Posted by crpgnut
I feel the focus of II was lost in comparison to I. When you create challenges, you also have to make it so the challenges can be completed. Therefore, all of the gameplay must make allowances for this. When I played it, I found areas where I thought the game would have played out differently, had it not been for the challenges. I only played it through once though and will likely skip III if it has the same limitations. Still, you got my money BW, so you should be happy. I'll probably play III too, if the game is cheap enough. A low enough price will allow me to ignore the silliness of challenges.

It's been a long time since I played it, and it was enough of a irritant that I never replayed.

My god, the challenges had nothing to do with the actual game, it shouldn't have effected your gameplay at all if you did not care for them. I'm at a loss to how they did?

Originally Posted by crpgnut
I feel the focus of II was lost in comparison to I. When you create challenges, you also have to make it so the challenges can be completed. Therefore, all of the gameplay must make allowances for this. When I played it, I found areas where I thought the game would have played out differently, had it not been for the challenges. I only played it through once though and will likely skip III if it has the same limitations. Still, you got my money BW, so you should be happy. I'll probably play III too, if the game is cheap enough. A low enough price will allow me to ignore the silliness of challenges.

It's been a long time since I played it, and it was enough of a irritant that I never replayed.

So, you're letting a separate system that has absolutely no effect on gameplay - unless you specifically want it to - have an effect on gameplay, and then you complain about it as if it wasn't your personal choice?

DArtagnan

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
So, you're letting a separate system that has absolutely no effect on gameplay - unless you specifically want it to - have an effect on gameplay, and then you complain about it as if it wasn't your personal choice?

Let me use small words; The challenges directly affected how the game was built from the ground up. Book II doesn't play like Book I, I liked Book I much better. Now, this is opinion, as is all the stuff that spouts from your orifices. It's a valid point, but you may not be able to ascertain it. Let's say you have an achievement (oops sorry, he called it challenge) that says kill all monsters with an edged weapon. Okay, now you must build the whole game so that it can be completed using only edged weapons. I can't explain it any more simply than that. I'm not a fan of achievements either. I just think they're silly.

Also, it wasn't a deal breaker. I bought Book II knowing that he had added achievements and high score multipliers. I'm just not sure that I will buy Book III if those are in there again. It's my money and my opinion. BW likes the money and RPGWatch is all about opinions. Get it?

Originally Posted by rune_74
But you don't have to get those achievements or challenges. I never made a character with only using edged weapons because I did not care about the achievement.

I can tell you for a fact that the game was not made from the ground up for challenges and achievements.

I guess CRPGnut argument is that it influenced the game design enough to make it a (subjectively) poorer experience. Where exactly did you feel that was the case, CRPGnut? Which elements do you think suffered from compromises made due to the existence of challenges?

Originally Posted by Lemonhead
With the single character on screen and looking at the GUI I assume the third installment will not be party based? I thought I heard rumors of this being party based? Maybe I'm confusing EB3 with something else.

When I see a game like this - the first thing I always try to check is whether it's party based and I always feel somewhat disappointed when I find out it's not. More party based CRPGs please! oh and turn based or at least pausable combat too…

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
I guess CRPGnut argument is that it influenced the game design enough to make it a (subjectively) poorer experience. Where exactly did you feel that was the case, CRPGnut? Which elements do you think suffered from compromises made due to the existence of challenges?

Yeah, I would understand if the game appeared to have been designed with these challenges as a major priority - but that's not the case.

I doubt they have had any effect on the balance/design except as a minor thing, but whatever.

DArtagnan

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
I guess CRPGnut argument is that it influenced the game design enough to make it a (subjectively) poorer experience. Where exactly did you feel that was the case, CRPGnut? Which elements do you think suffered from compromises made due to the existence of challenges?

It's been forever since I played it, but let me give you a current thought. Let's say that implementing the various system changes to create and track challenges took X amount of programming time. If that same x was instead used for allowing wide screen formats, this would be a much more welcome addiction. I honestly didn't take notes on what I did and didn't like in Book II, I just remember thinking challenges were silly and a waste of time. Of course, posting all of this is also a waste of time, but there ya go.

It'd be like if Bethesda removed dragons from their game so they could create a scoring system to be posted on a forum Woo, look at me I played a Breton warrior that specialized in two-handed melee even though Bretons make awesome mages and shitty warriors. Yippee! Nerdgasm for the win!

Originally Posted by crpgnut
It'd be like if Bethesda removed dragons from their game so they could create a scoring system to be posted on a forum Woo, look at me I played a Breton warrior that specialized in two-handed melee even though Bretons make awesome mages and shitty warriors. Yippee! Nerdgasm for the win!

Even if we pretend that implementing a trivial scoring system with simplistic challenges is the same as implementing extremely complex animation/AI/modelling/texturing/etc. like the dragons in Skyrim (as an amateur programmer - I could do the former in my sleep and I wouldn't have a prayer of doing the latter) - would you also consider Skyrim a "bad game with conditional bullcrap" without dragons, or might it be worth playing anyway?

DArtagnan

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
I guess CRPGnut argument is that it influenced the game design enough to make it a (subjectively) poorer experience. Where exactly did you feel that was the case, CRPGnut? Which elements do you think suffered from compromises made due to the existence of challenges?

They were really a minor part of the game design, and I think a lot came from the community. I can tell you of all the conversations I have had with BW over the years never did we talk about challenges.

Crpgnut, I get what you mean but I think there`s a slight flaw in your logic.
You`re assuming here Basilisk Games actually adopted a bottom up approach and first designed the challenges and then made the game to suit these challenges (which would be a pretty silly design decision and also easy to detect).
But what if (and this is how I think it happened) they first made the game just the way they wanted to and then only after that implemented the challenge system? I`d assume by doing it this way the game itself would not be influenced. I suppose this was the way they did it because the scoring system was completely transparent to me. I didn`t feel it at all during my playthrough and only noticed it in the end.